167
167
Jul 24, 2011
07/11
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 167
favorite 0
quote 0
>> they seem very big now. what we did was terrible, but you're talking about handling the crisisi am sorry, my son has just told me not to gesticulate. i don't believe that either he or mr hinton made any great mistakes. were mistakes made within the organisation? absolutely. were people that i trusted or that they trusted badly betrayed? yes. >> finally, to james murdoch, it was reported that when rebekah brooks spoke to staff to announce the closure of news of the world, she said that in a year's time they might understand why the paper had to close. i won't ask you to comment on what she thought in saying that, but what is the significance of the period of time of a year? do you expect there to be significantly more revelations that, with hindsight, made the closure of news of the world inevitable? >> i can't speak to what she was specifically referring to. she made those comments herself when she was saying goodbye, sadly, to the staff. i can say that what happened at the news of the worldthe events leadin
>> they seem very big now. what we did was terrible, but you're talking about handling the crisisi am sorry, my son has just told me not to gesticulate. i don't believe that either he or mr hinton made any great mistakes. were mistakes made within the organisation? absolutely. were people that i trusted or that they trusted badly betrayed? yes. >> finally, to james murdoch, it was reported that when rebekah brooks spoke to staff to announce the closure of news of the world, she said...
190
190
Jul 24, 2011
07/11
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 190
favorite 0
quote 0
and being too big to fail requires allowing a cfi to fail. the second part of the act empowers the fed and the fdic to reduce the affect on the system in the event of a failure to tools such as liquidation of authority and approve a resolution planning. the federal reserve is working with the fdic to thecfis prepare for resolution by adopting living wills. the joint rule is expected this summer. reducing the likelihood of a severe crisis requires strengthening the resilience of markets an infrastructure. toward that end, provisions to improve the transparency and stability of the derivatives market and strength since he th -- strengthens the parts of the infrastructure. we and other agencies are moving this work for in consultation with the corporate foreign regulators. u.s. agencies are working to address structural weaknesses in areas not as easily addressed by the at, such as taconic repo -- such as the repo market. the fed is committed to the promulgation of rules that are sensible, protect smaller community institutions, and promote the
and being too big to fail requires allowing a cfi to fail. the second part of the act empowers the fed and the fdic to reduce the affect on the system in the event of a failure to tools such as liquidation of authority and approve a resolution planning. the federal reserve is working with the fdic to thecfis prepare for resolution by adopting living wills. the joint rule is expected this summer. reducing the likelihood of a severe crisis requires strengthening the resilience of markets an...
177
177
Jul 2, 2011
07/11
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 177
favorite 0
quote 0
>> tom, you made the case of why to big to fail is a problem. but in talking about how you discourage or stop it, at least in the oral remarks you put emphasis on bringing back glass-steagall. what about size caps? if you are worried about size, that is the most direct way and you could argue well, even with glass-steagall you could get mergers, very large institutions, $2 trillion. they could lose their money on cni loans rather than investment banking. what about size katz, 3% to 4% of gdp, and that half a dozen u.s. institutions would be already above the cap and would have to come down over some period. you also have much bigger capital surcharges than what was agreed to over the weekend. that would be another way to i am just curious as to why he chose the glass-steagall route as opposed to the other routes for discouraging to big to fail? >> we did it and think about size. but part of what we thought about its size it isn't really the factory -- it is one of the factors, but not the primary factor. it is the nature of the risk -- whether y
>> tom, you made the case of why to big to fail is a problem. but in talking about how you discourage or stop it, at least in the oral remarks you put emphasis on bringing back glass-steagall. what about size caps? if you are worried about size, that is the most direct way and you could argue well, even with glass-steagall you could get mergers, very large institutions, $2 trillion. they could lose their money on cni loans rather than investment banking. what about size katz, 3% to 4% of...
183
183
Jul 17, 2011
07/11
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 183
favorite 0
quote 0
one would be eight to big to fail type attacks. it's your assets are over a threshold level, you pay a separate tax. one can limit interest deductibility. the first thing to realize is that financial institutions are highly specialized and understanding them is extremely difficult. regulatory apparatuses our best. but does not mean we have succeeded in the past, but it also does not mean we should try it tax instruments in a very complex setting with highly responsive taxpayers and a lot of this additional detail. that is why i am very skeptical of the tax estimate to address financial leverage. not because it is not a problem, but because there are better ways to do it. i understand there has been a failure to do it. there is little evidence in my mind that these kinds of taxes or a representation of the vengeance many of us feel. >> financial planners plan all around any kind of financial regulations. they are clever. >> indeed they are. >> they are driven to find a product that will find the greatest return. >> they will do more
one would be eight to big to fail type attacks. it's your assets are over a threshold level, you pay a separate tax. one can limit interest deductibility. the first thing to realize is that financial institutions are highly specialized and understanding them is extremely difficult. regulatory apparatuses our best. but does not mean we have succeeded in the past, but it also does not mean we should try it tax instruments in a very complex setting with highly responsive taxpayers and a lot of...